American Lecithin Co. v. W. A. Cleary Corp.

D. New Jersey

American Lecithin Co. v. W. A. Cleary Corp.

1 F.R.D. 603, 48 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 585, 1941 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2001

CourtDistrict Court, D. New Jersey

DecidedJanuary 14, 1941

DocketCivil Action No. 822

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 1 F.R.D. 603 (American Lecithin Co. v. W. A. Cleary Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

American Lecithin Co. v. W. A. Cleary Corp., 1 F.R.D. 603, 48 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 585, 1941 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2001 (D.N.J. 1941).

Pincite

Opinion

WALKER, District Judge.

This matter comes before the court on motion for order requiring the plaintiff to more specifically and more, completely answer Interrogatory No. 6 (reserved by order dated November 18, 1940, filed November 18, 1940).

Rules 26 to 37, inclusive, of the Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c, relating to depositions, discovery, depositions on oral examination and written interrogatories, interrogatories to parties, discovery and production of documents and things for inspection, copying, or photographing, and the admission of facts and genuineness of documents were formulated with the intention of granting the widest latitude in ascertaining before trial facts concerning the real issues in dispute, and permitting the interrogatories to parties in connection with any relevant matter in order to make available the facts pertinent to the issues to be decided at the trial and eliminate all expense and difficulty that would be involved in their production at the trial. They were formulated with a view to simplifying the issues. Nichols v. Sanborn Co., D. C. Mass., 1938, 24 F.Supp. 908, 910.

In view of the foregoing this court feels that a more specific and more complete answer to Interrogatory No. 6 is necessary.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

WALKER, District Judge.

This matter comes before the court on motion for order requiring the plaintiff to more specifically and more, completely answer Interrogatory No. 6 (reserved by order dated November 18, 1940, filed November 18, 1940).

Rules 26 to 37, inclusive, of the Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c, relating to depositions, discovery, depositions on oral examination and written interrogatories, interrogatories to parties, discovery and production of documents and things for inspection, copying, or photographing, and the admission of facts and genuineness of documents were formulated with the intention of granting the widest latitude in ascertaining before trial facts concerning the real issues in dispute, and permitting the interrogatories to parties in connection with any relevant matter in order to make available the facts pertinent to the issues to be decided at the trial and eliminate all expense and difficulty that would be involved in their production at the trial. They were formulated with a view to simplifying the issues. Nichols v. Sanborn Co., D. C. Mass., 1938, 24 F.Supp. 908, 910.

In view of the foregoing this court feels that a more specific and more complete answer to Interrogatory No. 6 is necessary.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 F.R.D. 603, 48 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 585, 1941 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2001, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/american-lecithin-co-v-w-a-cleary-corp-njd-1941.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack